I think it also reveals the anti-gun attitude, viewpoint and ideology. If my car gets stolen and used in a bank robbery I'm not liable for it. But the antis think that if someone's gun gets stolen there should be someone to sue.

What is the legal principle behind this?

Another way to punish gun owners, just one month at a time - not all at once.

Criminals don't pay insurance (look at cars)
they will be entirely UN INSURED
hence, everybody will have to carry
Un/under insured gun owners insurance, I'm sure it can be added as a rider to your standard health insurance

see, my idea is to spread it ALL around, mind you it's pointless (drownings and all are higher, but hey, we all pay for flood insurance)

This email link is to reach site administrators for assistance, if you cannot access TFL via other means. If you are a TFL member and can access TFL, please do not use this link; instead, use the forums (like Questions, Suggestions, and Tech Support) or PM an appropriate mod or admin.

If you are experiencing difficulties posting in the Buy/Sell/Trade subforums of TFL, please read the "sticky" announcement threads at the top of the applicable subforum. If you still feel you are qualified to post in those subforums, please contact "Shane Tuttle" (the mod for that portion of TFL) via Private Message for assistance.

This email contact address is not an "Ask the Firearms Expert" service. Such emails will be ignored. If you have a firearm related question, please register and post it on the forums.